NPM Package Size about lodash HOT 18 CLOSED

I think you should use Lo-Dash, but the package contains everything Lo-Dash needs to be customizable. There is no excess or room to make cuts. Worse case you can include a static file instead of a managed npm dependency. Either way the package size isn't really important as it's not being pushed down the pipe to the client side or smth ;D

from lodash.

is there a reason you went with closure compiler over uglify, which can be managed with npm? It's the main thing adding size to the project.

from lodash.

is there a reason you went with closure compiler over uglify, which can be managed with npm? It's the main thing adding size to the project.

Yep, Closure compiler has consistently produced smaller file sizes. I use a mixed minification approach where I do a pass with Uglify, then one with Closure Compiler, then a hybrid of Closure Compiler+Uglify (usually the smallest result). I don't rely on NPM dependencies because I want Lo-Dash to work out-of-the-box from a GitHub repo, NPM, JamJS or wherever. Why is file size really an issue?

from lodash.

just want to keep out any extra size I can. while it may not be a big deal, its still makes the project directory bigger / takes a bit longer to install and most IDEs will index those extra files in the node_modules, specially if they are vendor JS files.

from lodash.

If file size is a blocker, then just include the single lodash.min.js file.

from lodash.

i may look into it. we only use underscore package for the pre-compiled template source ATM as underscore of grunt v0.3.x is outdated.

from lodash.

Cool. You could create a custom build lodash include=template to create a minified version with just the _.template function. Also, as a bonus Lo-Dash's compiled templates generate less code and work with simple string coercion in most environments as well as the .source property.

from lodash.

ah wasn't sure if that would work. was just looking at that section. i've just started really using lodash as you seem to have a higher priority for fixing bugs and making them perform even better.

from lodash.

hum getting a warning about nativeKeys missing when using that build command in node.

EDIT: using the source code (included via require in node) that your build command produced.

from lodash.

hum getting a warning about nativeKeys missing when using that build command in node.

Which version of Lo-Dash are you using?

I bumped v0.5.2 and fixed some build bugs with it.
I just tested that exact build configuration last night ;D

from lodash.

v0.5.2

Build Command: lodash include=template
Build Output: https://gist.github.com/3426664

from lodash.

I see you are using the debug build which may help with builds options like mobile, underscore, backbone. You should be using the generated lodash.custom.min.js, which has unused vars removed. I'll document that better.

from lodash.

ok but what if I want to be able to keep track of changes say, I rebuild to new lodash in future, i want my git history to show all changes in a readable way?

from lodash.

guess its not a big deal, just a thought. thanks for the help.

from lodash.

In the commit you could link to the Changelog: https://github.com/bestiejs/lodash/wiki/Changelog

from lodash.

@ctalkington I tweaked build.js to allow using the debug build in more build configs. You can update by npm uninstall and npm install ing Lo-Dash.

from lodash.

@jdalton nice. thanks for taking the time!

from lodash.

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

from lodash.